[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 7 (Wednesday, February 2, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H192-H193]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ELIMINATE MARRIAGE TAX PENALTY IN A RESPONSIBLE WAY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Minge) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. MINGE. Mr. Speaker, we have returned here in the year 2000 to
begin our work as the U.S. House of Representatives. One of the first
bills that we will take up will come on, I expect, February 14. The
purpose of this is to address a problem which has been a festering
issue in our Tax Code; namely, the so-called marriage tax penalty.
There has been widespread recognition that it simply is unfair and is
inconsistent with public policy to have a Tax Code which places a
burden on folks that choose to get married. Now, as we analyze the Tax
Code, there is both a marriage bonus and a marriage tax penalty. It is
a fairly complex issue as we work through it. And trying to root it out
of the Tax Code is not necessarily easy nor is it inexpensive.
The Committee on Ways and Means, I understand, has marked up this
bill today and will be sending it to the floor for consideration by
Valentine's Day. That certainly is an appropriate or a fitting tribute
to marriage as an institution in our Nation, but I submit that this is
premature in terms of consideration on the floor of the House in the
sense that there is a fairly high price tag to the bill that is coming
from the Ways and Means, and we still have not had any opportunity to
formulate a budget for operations here in the year 2000.
[[Page H193]]
I would like to just briefly, for the benefit of my colleagues, point
out some of the budget considerations that make this an awkward and
inappropriate time here in February to take up the marriage tax penalty
legislation.
This pie chart shows the available surplus according to the last
estimates or projections from the Congressional Budget Office. The
total surplus over the next 10 years, if there is an absolute freeze on
spending, is projected to be $1.8 trillion. Now, this is a happy state
of affairs. It is a surplus without using the Social Security Trust
Fund and the money that is accumulating there.
Of this surplus, over $1 trillion would be used if we simply
continued the programs that we have had, with the caps but with
adjustments for inflation. So this leaves us with a more modest
surplus, which is actually around $837 billion. And this again is over
a 10-year period of time. It would be the green and the orange portions
of this pie chart.
Now, a portion of even that $837 billion is not necessarily as easily
available as we would like to think, and that is because we have
certain tax provisions which are set to expire. And if they are to be
extended, and we have routinely extended these tax provisions for the
benefit of taxpayers in our society; and if we consider the farm aid
legislation, which is expected to be passed this year and succeeding
years, as it has been in previous years, about $230 billion, or more
than 25 percent of the $837 billion, would be used for those tax
benefit pieces of legislation and for farm aid legislation. This leaves
us with the green portion, about $607 billion.
Even that has a certain duplicitous character to it because it fails
to recognize that about $200 billion of the green portion is actually a
surplus that is being generated in the Medicare trust fund.
Now, we have all taken a fairly solemn pledge that we will not go
into the Social Security Trust Fund to finance government expenditures
or to finance tax reduction that Social Security has to be protected
from that type of invasion. But I submit that if we are hearing from
our hospitals and other health care providers at home, we are preparing
ourselves to make a parallel commitment to the Medicare program.
Medicare is financially more precarious than Social Security, and we
certainly have thousands and thousands of health care providers around
the country that have been sharing with us the struggle that they are
going through with the cutbacks that have been made in financing
Medicare.
So I would submit that there are several hundred billion dollars
there that is also unavailable. So what I would urge my colleagues to
do is to make sure that we responsibly deal with the marriage tax
penalty legislation so that we do not somehow handicap ourselves in
developing a proper budget.
____________________